Wind Rose Academy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 824017661
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2021
- Forms available
- Form 990 2021, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- Plano, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8323856095
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Specialized Education Institutions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $818,259
- Expenses
- $528,051
- Assets
- $15,030
- Liabilities
- $17,226
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JENNIFER KEESE (PRESIDENT)
- PHILIP KEESE (CO-PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- PHILIP KEESE (CO-PRESIDENT): $216,329 total reported compensation
- JENNIFER KEESE (PRESIDENT): $109,826 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Wind rose academy represents a new generation of schools educating children on the autism spectrum by both addressing their unique needs and also recognizing their abilities to function fully as contributing participants in adult society.
What it reported doing in 2021
Uplifted - crafts and decorlife skills learning lab with individualized motor and social goals. Offers a complete facility for learning self-help and coping skills. Includes a variety of additional small project, social opportunities through craft or skills-based pre-readied projects that teach the students how to compile, build, sell, and spend money surrounding items of value they create with limited educator assistance, &/or obtain learning awareness behind a variety of life skills needed to be mastered.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 69
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.9%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 35.5%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.15; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 74.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -60.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 56.9% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $466K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $216K · 2 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2019 to 2021
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.